Of weapons and bandits....(rant time)

It changes them. And, as repeatdly posted in this and other threads, rules changes are out of the scope of Co8 mods.

We all know that one handed spearlike weapons did get used. Please consider that acquired (I would bet 99% of us did *already* know that), no need to repeat it again. We also know that ancient phalanx formation did use *long*spears one-handed with shield. This has little bearings on D&D combat rules, that are fantasy, abstract and try to re-create individual skirmishes and not formation combat. I have no experience in fencing, but I strongly suspect that a sword-and-shield fighter would have a distinctive adventage onto a spear-and-shield one (faster response, much more effective at closer range) once he penetrates his defences (if the latter is not in a formation, of course). Now that would be an appropriate thinking for, maybe, GURPS, surely not for D&D.

The problems are many.
a) the Co8 policy is not to change rules. This alone would be enough.
b) the spear you proposed is not that balanced. The spear is quite a good weapons choice *even* two handed, let alone one handed. There are other posts explaining this very well. I take the chance to suggest you to make, in your house rule, your one-handed spear a martial weapon. You would (or at least you should) agree that all the historical examples you carried were of warrior-like people, supposed to possess the martial weapons proficiency.
c) the spear you proposed causes more problems (two weapons fighting, small characters) than it solves (actually none but your dislike of one half-word)
d) your proposal is not really needed, since the spear-and-shield combination is effectively covered by the normal rules with the shortspear weapon category, that I repeat, covers all the spears that can be used one-handed, regardless of how long you think they should be.

If the fact that the spear used one-handed are called SHORTspears instead of just spears and exists a category of spears that, without having reach, must be wielded two-handed is the greater problem you find in D&D 3+, well, I do not know what to say...

The picture is of one shortspear that is, indeed, very short. It doeas nothing to demonstrate that longer "short"spears do not fall under this weapon category, hence need an appropriate weapon category taken away from the "middle"spear.

a) "Unsuitable for throwing" does not necessarily mean you can't throw it at all, if you *really* want. 6m is an heck of a short range increment: of very little use in real combat (if an enemy is at 12-18 m the last thing you are thinking is to disarm yourself in a tricky chance of hitting him before he closes. Specially if he's not alone.)
a2) The whole throwing-not-throwing debate sounds pretty moot to me. In real word you may throw everything, even chairs. If I now I pick up my hammer, go in my garden and throw it, I would be very happy if I even reach the first range increment. And it's much lighter than the "light hammer" weapon that, by the rules, could be thrown up to 60m (ten range increments). Now, that are much sillier rules than yours, but such situations arise so rarely that one can easily pass over them.
b) The fact that your reference, not written for a D&D supplement and then not written in D&D techincal jargon, call the framea a shortspear does not mean automatically that it must be a shortspear for D&D rules. Since it's "very close to a javelin in use", it points pretty clearly to the fact that it should fall into the javelin category.
c) If the anglo-saxon spear your reference writes about could be used one-handed it should fall in the D&D shortspear category. It's there just for that.
d) When I master D&D I use a number of house rules, included one (that I call "monkey grip") that allows to use a two-handed weapon one-handed, but with many disvantages, some of which may be bought off fighting in close formations that protect your flanks. As you see I'm not totally unsensitive to the issues you point out. I just think there's really no need to change the weapon tables on this matter.

 

Apart from the fact Tacitus was talking out of his backside about the Germanic tribes mainly using the framea. Swords are barely mentioned but archaeological evidence is showing that they were fairly common at the time. (Sorry for the nitpick but I do Anglo-Saxon history for a living).

No-one knows exactly what the framea Tacitus is on about was. The problem is that he mentions that the Germanic tribes also used the framea from horseback. Now it's quite possible that he's referring to a similar type of spear as the Breton cavalry were using at Hastings as we know the Anglo-Saxons also had cavalry equipped with a similar kind of spear. By any definition, that's a short spear. As opposed to an 8 foot + monstrosity which is totally worthless close up if you aren't in an organised formation. Short spears can be thrown.
The Masai were referenced earlier and it's worthwhile noting that the assegai is both a throwing and a hand to hand weapon. That's why warriors tend to have two or three of them.

WotC goofed on many things (morning star is a ludicrously difficult weapon to use without braining yourself) but they made a reasonable assumption for non-formation based combat. If you've got a big spear, you need two hands to use it when up close and personal. That's why hoplites had their shields bound to their arms just to carry the things and, after the initial charge, they switched to the xiphos.

 

@Zebedee: Sorry to nitpick, but

The D&D morningstar is basically a mace with added spikes. What I think you're thinking of (spiked ball on a chain) is in the rules as a flail.

We can all thank Castlevania for that mix-up of nomeclature.

 

What Zebedee said. The spear can and was used one handed......in formations. It lends itself quite well to one handed use....in formations. You could certainly fight quite well outside of formation with a standard spear and shield if your opponent is armed the exact same way or unarmed. If your oponent has a different weapon, say, a sword, axe, or shortspear, you'll be toast trying to handle an 7 foot long spear in one hand.

 

I remember the good ol' days when you had a weapon and it would do damage for S/M or L opponents. It was simple and worked, nothing about how a weapon was gripped or held. In one particular case, if a character used a two-handed sword with one hand, instead of two hands, it did the damage of a hand-and-a-half sword [bastard sword] for S/M or L opponents. Otherwise, a two-handed sword did the damage it was supposed to do.

Having said that, a short spear should do its damage regardless of whether its held using one or two hands and just have a long spear do short spear damage if a long spear was held using one hand in combat. Is that too simple of a solution?

 

*laff* ok, well - with respect to the rules, I had to ask.

[EDIT] I will never buy any new D&D rules book, the owners want people to buy books where the rules have been completely re-done, instead of just buying new game books with monsters and modules.
What happens when version 4.0 is released...a whole new library of books with revamped rules - not just new books to add to the collection with new monsters and places to adventure. I might buy issues of the Dragon magazine, but not any new rule books.

 

Not to cast aspersions on your statement, but could you possibly provide anything akin to primary source evidence, since Tacitus LIVED at the time of the Germanic tribes moving into Europe?

 

Erm, first rule of historical studies - classical sources lie, misinterpret and are generally biased. If you read De Origine et situ Germanorum, you'll see what I mean.

So when he says that all German tribes used a spear, then we know he is mistaken because he was aware of the Longbards (and even gave them a latinised version of their name) who we know got their name because they used a long-handled axe which was called a 'longbeard' as their weapon of choice.

As you don't accept the standard view of Tacitus, could you define what you mean by primary source for pre-literate societies? Would you accept Beowulf or the Niebelung (works which refer to the time periods where the Germanic tribes were in contact with the Romans or shortly afterwards)?

Would you accept the evidence of German auxiliaries using a more spatha like sword for infantry rather than the traditional gladius? Later the Romans abandonned the gladius in favour of the spatha. Much as the Germanic infantry used a different sized shield and eventually had it become the standard shield of the late Roman Empires.

Perhaps the evidence of furstengraber (graves with items inside them)? Headegger's paper (The Evolution of Germanic Society, First Millenium Papers, BAR, Int. Series 401, Oxford, p. 129 - 144) notes that at the time of Tacitus the Germanic tribes were burying swords of the Celtic models, a short sword which would give its name to the Saxons and a proto-spatha sword.

As I said, Tacitus is a useful source but nowhere near definitive in his descriptions of the German tribes.

 

Spear (as described by Keolander)
Simple Weapon
Cost: 2gp Weight:6lbs
1-handed melee weapon
1d6/1d8 Piercing (x3 Crit)
No range increment (cannot be effectively thrown), no reach ability (its only circa 7ft in length)
Can be set against charge for x2 damage

Short Spear
Simple Weapon
Cost: 2gp Wieght:5lbs
1-handed melee weapon (Though not sure why it is 1-handed seeing it is a large weapon)
1d8 Piercing (x3 crit)
Has a range of 20', no reach
Large weapon so to my knowledge it can be set vs charge

See any similarities here so why are we discussing this. Who cares what Wizards of the Coast calls it, it is the same weapon you seek to have added into the game but with a range. Just don't throw it and move onto another topic. I personally never use a spear whether it is long or short and i am sure a few others don't either. you want it in ask for directions on how to Mod a weapon and put it into your game but you are asking for a weapon that is in place but without a range.

Macer

 

of course being able to throw a big'ole spear is a cool feat, and the extra 1d8 damage it backs behind it is great, but think about it...is it going to do you any good against hill giants & gargoyles?

 

Would it be truly breaking the rules to make a Short Spear be a one handed weapon in ToEE and leave everything as is in the protos for it alone with no other changes?

Would that, instead, be a viable solution?

Note: I believe everyone who has real interest in D&D, over time, has read about and, maybe, seen photos, paintings, and drawings depicting common army foot soldiers wielding about a 60-inch spear [I used the term about 60-inches] in one hand and also wielding a shield using their other arm.

 

As spaceman already pointed out there is already a short spear as i described in CO8 called a short spear the stats i gave are from the Player hand book of that weapon, You can use a spear and shield and the stats are near the same who cares if you can throw it is you use it as a main weapon. who wants to ditch their weapon anyway.

I don't thin having a weapon that can be thrown and used with a shield will break the rules anymore then making a enlarged version of any of the normal weapons for a Med char to use two handed or a large char to 1 hand as you can do in PnP

Macer

 

what I found - Short spears thrown
Two of the most noted throwing spears are the javelin from the Greeks and the pilum from the Romans. The pilum was a throwing spear commonly used by the Roman army in ancient times. It was 2m long and weighs about 3kg with a maximum range of 30 meters [meters is right - not feet].

Short spears were thrown in combat [are not Long Spears]
Short spear (common name, general term); Javelin [greek] (or called Soliferrum [roman]); Pilum [roman]; Angon; Assegai; Ballam; Bandang; Bhala; Bilari; Budiak; Cateia; Do-War; Egchos; Enhero; Fal-feg; Framea; Gravo; Golo; Granggang; Hak; Harpoon; Hinyan; Hoko; Huata; Irpull; Ja-Mandehi; Jaculum; Jarid; Jiboru; Kasita; Kamayari; Kan-Shoka; Kannai; Kapun; Kiero; Kikuki; Koveh; Koy-yung; Koyuan; Kujolio; Kuyan; Laange; Lance-Ague; Lama-pe; Leister; Mandehi liguje; Mahee; Makrigga; Mkukt; Mongile; Mongoli; Mu-Rongal; Nage-Yari; Nandum; Nerau; Paralyser; Patisthanaya; Pelta; Pill; Pillara; Plumbate; Sang; Sangkoh; Sanokat; Saunion; Shail; Shanen kopaton; Siligis; Simbilan; Sinan; Sligi; Spiculum; Sudanese lance; Tahr Ruan; Tao; Tawok; Telempang; Te yari; Tirrer; Tjunkuletti; Tombak; Tschehouta; Tumpuling; Wainian; Wallunka; Wi-Valli; Zagaye